KBUF vs. KCAI

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

KBUF (KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF) and KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KBUF is a Options Trading fund actively managed by KraneShares, while KCAI is a China Equities fund tracking the Qi China Alpha Index. KBUF is actively managed, while KCAI is passively managed. Over the past year, KBUF returned -6.32% vs 39.53% for KCAI. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KBUF charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KCAI.

Performance

KBUF vs. KCAI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KBUF achieves a -12.82% return, which is significantly lower than KCAI's 3.23% return.

KBUF

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: -0.32%
• 6M: -16.85%
• YTD: -12.82%
• 1Y: -6.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KCAI

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: -4.13%
• 6M: 2.63%
• YTD: 3.23%
• 1Y: 39.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KBUF vs. KCAI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	-12.82%	18.04%	10.42%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	3.23%	53.29%	11.36%

Correlation

The correlation between KBUF and KCAI is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024	0.47

Return for Risk

KBUF vs. KCAI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KBUF

KBUF Risk / Return Rank: 6
KBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
KBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
KBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 6

KCAI

KCAI Risk / Return Rank: 94
KCAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
KCAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
KCAI Omega Ratio Rank: 93
KCAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
KCAI Martin Ratio Rank: 94

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

KBUF vs. KCAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	KBUF	KCAI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.48	2.88	-3.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.59	4.15	-4.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.50	-0.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.30	6.74	-7.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.66	21.56	-22.22

KBUF vs. KCAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBUF Sharpe Ratio is -0.48, which is lower than the KCAI Sharpe Ratio of 2.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBUF and KCAI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

KBUF vs. KCAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBUF drawdown since its inception was -21.14%, smaller than the maximum KCAI drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBUF and KCAI.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBUF	KCAI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.14%	-25.48%	+4.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.14%	-5.90%	-15.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.97%	-5.37%	-12.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.78%	-6.95%	+2.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.63%	1.84%	+7.79%

Volatility

KBUF vs. KCAI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) is 3.28%, while KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) has a volatility of 4.63%. This indicates that KBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KCAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBUF	KCAI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	4.63%	-1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.56%	9.15%	+1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.25%	13.81%	-0.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.22%	20.88%	-6.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.22%	20.88%	-6.66%

KBUF vs. KCAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

KBUF has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KCAI's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

KBUF vs. KCAI - Dividend Comparison

KBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.62%, less than KCAI's 34.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	8.62%	7.51%	3.53%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	34.31%	35.42%	2.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBUF and KCAI in my portfolio?

KBUF and KCAI have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KBUF or KCAI?

KCAI has higher volatility (4.63%) compared to KBUF (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBUF dropped -21.14% vs KCAI's -25.48%.

Which ETF is better, KBUF or KCAI?

On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 39.53% vs -6.32% for KBUF. On fees, KCAI is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, KBUF has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBUF or KCAI?

Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 39.53% return vs -6.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBUF or KCAI?

KCAI is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KBUF or KCAI?

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 34.31%, compared with 8.62% for KBUF.

What is the main difference between KBUF and KCAI?

KBUF is categorized as Options Trading, while KCAI is China Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for KBUF and 0.79% for KCAI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.88 vs -0.48), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.